[Advaita-l] Comments of an ISCKON follower

[Sunil Bhattacharjya]

Namaskar,

When the Brahman wanted to be many there was modification even. At that stage there was Nirguna and therefore saying that he could have had modificatiuon like gold having shapes as ornaments may not really hold good. To create the guna-visista world he had to assume the guna-visista form of Saguna Brahman. It is our goodluck that Lord Krishna, the Saguna Brahman told us that what is difficult to achieve by concentrating on the Nirguna Brahman can be easily achieved through him. At least I shall not like to challenge Lord Krishna as to how can he help us realize the oneness with the Nirguna Brahman. IMHO it is impossible for a Visistadvatin and a Dvaitin to understand the Sayujya Mukti in conformity with the MuktikA Upanishad. In Sayujya mukti there is only the Brahman  and nothing beside him.

Regards,
Sunil KB

________________________________
 From: kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 11:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Comments of an ISCKON follower
 
Sudhakarji - PraNAms 

Here are the steps to dismiss the reality to the plurality that is perceived- taking an example of gold ornaments piled up on the table. 

1. I see there are many gold ornaments on the table, each one distinctly different - ring, bangle, bracelet, etc. Each has its own attributes and utilities that distinguish it from the rest of them. All the gold ornaments are created from the same gold - Au.

2. I examine any one ornament closely - taking for example a ring. I see ring is nothing but gold. Every part of the ring is gold only - so I see it is gold in the form of the ring. Same goes with other ornaments.

3. If I further examine the ring, I see there is really no ring at all - All I see is gold in the form of a ring for which a name ring is given  - there is no separate ring other than gold. Hence what is there is gold alone.

4. Looking at all the ornaments - all I find is just gold only - but different names for different forms. There is no really any creation other than the names for the forms of gold. 

What was there was gold, what is there is gold and even if we melt all the forms what will be there is only gold. Creation is nothing but giving different names for forms of gold. If you ask gold why are existing in various forms It will answer - 1. It is my vibhuuti to be in various forms yet still remaining as gold. 2. I am taking these forms to satisfy the needs (vaasanaas) of the different people to satisfy their desires and be happy (until of course somebody steals these from them)

brahma arpanam - brahma haviH .. everything is nothing but brahman. The rest that one experiences is nothing but vibhuuti of Brahman expressing as Iswara. Where do I find Brahman - where do I find gold when I see only ring, bangle and bracelet. Hence Brahmaarpanam sloka by Lord Krishna.  

I do not have to melt ring to see gold. I can, looking at the ring, say that there is really no ring at all but gold only. That is viveka seeing the unchanging adhiShTaanam in the changing world of plurality. Since what counts is gold not the names and forms. That is a-dviata in spite of apparent dvaita. 

Hari Om!
Sadananda

Hari Om!
Sadananda



--- On Tue, 3/20/12, Sudhakar Kabra <sudhakarkabra at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Sudhakar Kabra <sudhakarkabra at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Comments of an ISCKON follower
> To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
> Date: Tuesday, March 20, 2012, 11:05 PM
> Namaste
> In our study classes we were given an example on this
> context.
> Consider a heap of beads, Advaita considers the heap as one
> entity but vishiShTaadvaita consider the bead as
> individual forming the heap. Essentially it is a viewpoint
> how you look at it. Basically both are same.
> Regards
> 
> Sudhakar kabra
> 
> --- On Tue, 3/20/12, kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> 
> From: kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Comments of an ISCKON follower
> To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
> Date: Tuesday, March 20, 2012, 9:28 PM
> 
> Subbuji - PraNAms.
>  
> In the vishiShTaadvaita, the saayujya mukti involves
> everything what Sri Velukudi Krishnan swami said - except
> for two factors.
> Jiiva is still anupramaanaat - only a part of the total body
> of Iswara. 
> While he enjoys all the things mentioned except the creative
> power of the Iswara. Even though he is tiny he enjoys he
> infinite happiness that Iswara enjoyes.
> 
> In advaita Sujujyam means recognition of oneness - when we
> say pot space merges with the total space - or ring merges
> with gold - That is advaitic sayujya. It is an clear
> understanding that apparent duality is not reality but is
> mityaa only. That is suyujya in the sense the jiiva had the
> notion of separateness from jagat and Iswara. That
> dissolution of the notional division with the recognition of
> oneness is advaitic saayujya - in the same context that he
> becomes Brahman - not that he was separate from Brahman
> before. 
> 
> As long as one understands this, there should not be a
> problem since the very name a-dvaita indicates the negation
> of notional duality that is experienced. 
> 
> Hari Om!
> Sadananda
> 
> --- On Tue, 3/20/12, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> 
> > 
> > I just heard Sri Velukudi Krishnan Swami, a noted
> scholar
> > of
> > Vishishtadvaita say: 'parama sAmyApatti' is the
> sAyujya
> > mukti according to
> > this school.  This involves the jiva going to
> Vaikuntha
> > and attaining all
> > the 'attributes' of Vishnu like satyakAmatva,
> > satyasamkalpatva, and
> > enjoying the bhoga that Vishnu enjoys, along with Him,
> > They say: Vishnu 'gives' these jiva-s His own self.'
> > 
> 
> 
> Advaita does not
> > have any such concept.  We have the total giving up
> as
> > mithyA the jivatvam
> > and realizing one's Brahmatvam.  There is no
> 'sAyujyam'
> > in this.  The very
> > word 'sAyujya' involves a two-entity pre-requisite
> where one
> > 'joins' the
> > other, yet the two entities  remaining in tact. 
> > In Advaita there is only
> > one Reality which is to be realized.  There is no
> > joining something/someone
> > else.  That forms the core of the sAyujya mukti
> concept
> > and hence is not in
> > any way the Advaitic mukti.
> > 
> > subrahmanian.v
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Shyam Subramanian
> <shyamsub at gmail.com>wrote:
> > 
> > > Dear Sunilji,
> > >
> > > I am sure the scholars in the list will be able
> to
> > explain the difference
> > > better. Whatever I understood from the bhAshyA and
> the
> > > translations was that the sAlokya,sAmIpya,sArUpya
> and
> > sAyujya all pertain
> > > to saguNa brahman - hence sAyujya ("unifying with
> > saguNa brahman" ?) cannot
> > > be considered to be "brahmAtmanA saMsthitiH".
> > >
> > > As regards Sayujya mukti let us consider the
> statement
> > in the Ramayana,
> > > > which you must  be aware is considered
> equal
> > to Veda (as Ramayana itself
> > > > declares). Lord Ram offered Sayujya Mukti to
> > Hanuman and on Sayujya mukti
> > > > one does not have any individual body left.
> How
> > can then sayujya mukti be
> > > > anything other than complete dissolution of
> > individuality. Othyer types
> > > of
> > > > Mukti are not real mukti as it is known that
> even
> > after attaining sarupya
> > > > Mukti ravana had to take birth albeit it
> happened
> > due to acurse. That
> > > shows
> > > > that in all  forms of Mukti other than the
> > SayujyaMukti one is vulnerable
> > > > to taking birth. With all respects to Sri
> > CandraSekhara BhAratI SvAminaH
> > > > has anybody ever asked him for such
> > clarification?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Just curious, can you give me the source (kANDa,
> > adhyAya, verse) for the
> > > above statements/incidents in the vAlmIki rAmAyaNa
> ? I
> > couldn't find the
> > > word sAyujya mentioned in the rAmAyaNa at all.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Shyam
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> > 
> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> > 
> > For assistance, contact:
> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> 
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> 
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> 
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> 
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> 
_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita

To unsubscribe or change your options:
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l

For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org